Australians could require four or five jabs to be considered ‘up to date’

[Tanj]

Source for this claim?

United States: COVID-19 weekly death rate by vaccination status

 

[A_Thinker]

Source for this claim?

Breakthrough COVID-19 infections and deaths rose during delta, but far outpaced by the unvaccinated

 

[whatbogsends]

Breakthrough COVID-19 infections and deaths rose during delta, but far outpaced by the unvaccinated

Ahhh, the info is from the CDC. Too bad the CDC isn't actually sharing the data:

For more than a year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has collected data on hospitalizations for Covid-19 in the United States and broken it down by age, race and vaccination status. But it has not made most of the information public.

When the C.D.C. published the first significant data on the effectiveness of boosters in adults younger than 65 two weeks ago, it left out the numbers for a huge portion of that population: 18- to 49-year-olds, the group least likely to benefit from extra shots, because the first two doses already left them well-protected.
...
Two full years into the pandemic, the agency leading the country’s response to the public health emergency has published only a tiny fraction of the data it has collected, several people familiar with the data said.
...
But the C.D.C. has been routinely collecting information since the Covid vaccines were first rolled out last year, according to a federal official familiar with the effort. The agency has been reluctant to make those figures public, the official said, because they might be misinterpreted as the vaccines being ineffective.
...
Concern about the misinterpretation of hospitalization data broken down by vaccination status is not unique to the C.D.C. On Thursday, public health officials in Scotland said they would stop releasing data on Covid hospitalizations and deaths by vaccination status because of similar fears that the figures would be misrepresented by anti-vaccine groups.

But the experts dismissed the potential misuse or misinterpretation of data as an acceptable reason for not releasing it.

“We are at a much greater risk of misinterpreting the data with data vacuums, than sharing the data with proper science, communication and caveats,” Ms. Rivera said.

When the Delta variant caused an outbreak in Massachusetts last summer, the fact that three-quarters of those infected were vaccinated led people to mistakenly conclude that the vaccines were powerless against the virus — validating the C.D.C.’s concerns.

But that could have been avoided if the agency had educated the public from the start that as more people are vaccinated, the percentage of vaccinated people who are infected or hospitalized would also rise, public health experts said.

“Tell the truth, present the data,” said Dr. Paul Offit, a vaccine expert and adviser to the Food and Drug Administration. “I have to believe that there is a way to explain these things so people can understand it.”

Knowing which groups of people were being hospitalized in the United States, which other conditions those patients may have had and how vaccines changed the picture over time would have been invaluable, Dr. Offit said.

Relying on Israeli data to make booster recommendations for Americans was less than ideal, Dr. Offit noted. Israel defines severe disease differently than the United States, among other factors.

“There’s no reason that they should be better at collecting and putting forth data than we were,” Dr. Offit said of Israeli scientists. “The C.D.C. is the principal epidemiological agency in this country, and so you would like to think the data came from them.”

It has also been difficult to find C.D.C. data on the proportion of children hospitalized for Covid who have other medical conditions, said Dr. Yvonne Maldonado, chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics’s Committee on Infectious Diseases.

The C.D.C. Isn’t Publishing Large Portions of the Covid Data It Collects

It's no wonder the claims about vaccinated/unvaccinated Covid statistics are so utterly different from countries which actually exposed their data.

 

[hedrick]

NJ has been publishing its data. It’s similar. No easy link because it’s in Twitter postings.

 

[A_Thinker]

Ahhh, the info is from the CDC. Too bad the CDC isn't actually sharing the data:

For more than a year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has collected data on hospitalizations for Covid-19 in the United States and broken it down by age, race and vaccination status. But it has not made most of the information public.

That wasn't hospitalizations, ... that was deaths ... from death certificates ...

 

[KCfromNC]

Ahhh, the info is from the CDC. Too bad the CDC isn't actually sharing the data

Yes it is : COVID Data Tracker

 

[stevil]

United States: COVID-19 weekly death rate by vaccination status

That's quite an interesting graph.
If you filter by 65+ age range. It shows the unvaccinated are 26.7 times more likely to die of Covid than people that are current with boosters. People that are vaccinated but haven't had boosters don't fair quite as well, but still much better than the unvaccinated at 6.3 times less likely than the unvaccinated to die of Covid.

Surprisingly to me even the 18-49 age range, the unvaccinated are 26.25 times more likely to die of Covid than those that are current with boosters. So the ratio remains the same even in this less susceptible group.

Other items that I'd be interested in which isn't reflected in the chart would the ratio by age between people who are (unvaccinated and haven't ever recovered from Covid) compared to those that are current on vaccine boosters. I'd also like to see a graph line of those that have not been vaccinated but have recovered from Covid as well as those that have both recovered from Covid and been vaccinated.
I would just find that interesting data points.

It is obvious to me that lumping those that have recovered from Covid with those that have never had Covid and never had vaccines makes the unvaccinated survive rate look better than it would otherwise be for those that have never even caught Covid yet. But of course we just don't have that kind of data, many people have had cold symptoms and never got tested and many with Covid are asymptomatic.

 

[hedrick]

This seems interesting. Got a COVID booster? You probably won’t need another for a long time (originally from NY Times, but this isn’t behind a paywall). There’s grounds to doubt that further boosters will be needed, except for older people. They don’t react to immunization as well.

It appears that preventing infection decays over time, but the paper I looked says that protection against serious consequences continues. They also say that this works better after 3 doses.

 

[Bradskii]

This seems interesting. Got a COVID booster? You probably won’t need another for a long time (originally from NY Times, but this isn’t behind a paywall). There’s grounds to doubt that further boosters will be needed, except for older people. They don’t react to immunization as well.

It appears that preventing infection decays over time, but the paper I looked says that protection against serious consequences continues. They also say that this works better after 3 doses.

I get a flu jab every year. I'd have no problem in adding a covid one to that.

 

[hedrick]

I get a flu jab every year. I'd have no problem in adding a covid one to that.

I wouldn't either, but it's interesting to see researchers suggesting it might not be needed.

 

[whatbogsends]

That's quite an interesting graph.
If you filter by 65+ age range. It shows the unvaccinated are 26.7 times more likely to die of Covid than people that are current with boosters. People that are vaccinated but haven't had boosters don't fair quite as well, but still much better than the unvaccinated at 6.3 times less likely than the unvaccinated to die of Covid.

Surprisingly to me even the 18-49 age range, the unvaccinated are 26.25 times more likely to die of Covid than those that are current with boosters. So the ratio remains the same even in this less susceptible group.

Other items that I'd be interested in which isn't reflected in the chart would the ratio by age between people who are (unvaccinated and haven't ever recovered from Covid) compared to those that are current on vaccine boosters. I'd also like to see a graph line of those that have not been vaccinated but have recovered from Covid as well as those that have both recovered from Covid and been vaccinated.
I would just find that interesting data points.

It is obvious to me that lumping those that have recovered from Covid with those that have never had Covid and never had vaccines makes the unvaccinated survive rate look better than it would otherwise be for those that have never even caught Covid yet. But of course we just don't have that kind of data, many people have had cold symptoms and never got tested and many with Covid are asymptomatic.

And, of course if you look at the data from Scotland - you know, a country which wasn't hiding its data - you'll see that since December 2021, the vaccinated are being hospitalized and dying at a higher rate than the unvaccinated.

But please, do go on using data sourced by the CDC which has already admitted it was not showing the full data.

 

[KCfromNC]

And, of course if you look at the data from Scotland - you know, a country which wasn't hiding its data - you'll see that since December 2021, the vaccinated are being hospitalized and dying at a higher rate than the unvaccinated.

Meanwhile, back here in reality, here what the latest covid report from Scotland has to say (https://publichealthscotland.scot/media/11909/22-02-23-covid19-winter_publication_report.pdf)

Evidence has shown that vaccination is highly effective in protecting against death from coronavirus (COVID-19). A recent paper from Israel examined the effectiveness of the Pfizer (Comirnaty) booster vaccine and found that adults who had received their booster dose five months after their second dose had 90% lower risk of mortality due to COVID-19 than adults who hadn’t received their booster dose five months after their second dose. Data from the United Kingdom Health Security Agency (UKHSA) shows that after two or more weeks following a booster vaccine effectiveness was 95% against mortality.​

 

[stevil]

And, of course if you look at the data from Scotland - you know, a country which wasn't hiding its data - you'll see that since December 2021, the vaccinated are being hospitalized and dying at a higher rate than the unvaccinated.

But please, do go on using data sourced by the CDC which has already admitted it was not showing the full data.

I note that you didn't bother to provide any citation to your ridiculous claim.

I'd also be very interested to hear your logic reasoning as to why vaccines would increase the chances of a person going to hospital or dying.
Do you really think pharmacies and governments are approving and promoting a drug which increases the severity of Covid?

 

[trunks2k]

I note that you didn't bother to provide any citation to your ridiculous claim.

Because, IIRC, the source he uses to make that claim specifically states that the data does not actually show what he is claiming it shows. IIRC, the data in question is the same Simpson's paradox found in Israeli data

 

[stevil]

And, of course if you look at the data from Scotland - you know, a country which wasn't hiding its data - you'll see that since December 2021, the vaccinated are being hospitalized and dying at a higher rate than the unvaccinated.

It's very hard to refute someone who makes a claim but doesn't bother to provide a link to the data they are claiming to be their proof.

But anyway, since I am an open minded person and have an interest in truth, I did a quick search.
Perhaps you are referring to this

In your post you specifically were talking about rates.
"the vaccinated are being hospitalized and dying at a higher rate than the unvaccinated."

But the problem is that the data is in absolutes rather than in rates.
And as can easily be found, the Scottish population are overwhelmingly vaccinated with the unvaccinated as the overwhelming minority.
This article below, takes that same data and turns it from absolutes into rates.

Fact Check-Graph comparing Scottish COVID-19 hospitalisations and deaths by vaccination status lacks key information
“A higher overall number of COVID-19 related deaths among people who are vaccinated compared to those who are unvaccinated can be seen in current weekly reporting due to the fact that over 90% of individuals in Scotland are fully vaccinated against COVID-19”, it said in an email. “For those aged 50 and over, this is at almost 100%.”

This means that 8 out of every 100,000 fully vaccinated individuals were hospitalised, compared to 15 out of every 100,000 unvaccinated individuals, the PHS report says.

Similarily, it notes that there were 1,500 COVID-19 cases per 100,000 unvaccinated individuals compared to 420 COVID-19 cases per 100,000 individuals vaccinated with two doses.


So, yet again we have more misinformation being intentionally spread across the internet and promoted on this forum here.

 

[whatbogsends]

It's very hard to refute someone who makes a claim but doesn't bother to provide a link to the data they are claiming to be their proof.

But anyway, since I am an open minded person and have an interest in truth, I did a quick search.
Perhaps you are referring to this

In your post you specifically were talking about rates.
"the vaccinated are being hospitalized and dying at a higher rate than the unvaccinated."

But the problem is that the data is in absolutes rather than in rates.
And as can easily be found, the Scottish population are overwhelmingly vaccinated with the unvaccinated as the overwhelming minority.
This article below, takes that same data and turns it from absolutes into rates.

Fact Check-Graph comparing Scottish COVID-19 hospitalisations and deaths by vaccination status lacks key information
“A higher overall number of COVID-19 related deaths among people who are vaccinated compared to those who are unvaccinated can be seen in current weekly reporting due to the fact that over 90% of individuals in Scotland are fully vaccinated against COVID-19”, it said in an email. “For those aged 50 and over, this is at almost 100%.”

This means that 8 out of every 100,000 fully vaccinated individuals were hospitalised, compared to 15 out of every 100,000 unvaccinated individuals, the PHS report says.

Similarily, it notes that there were 1,500 COVID-19 cases per 100,000 unvaccinated individuals compared to 420 COVID-19 cases per 100,000 individuals vaccinated with two doses.


So, yet again we have more misinformation being intentionally spread across the internet and promoted on this forum here.

No, not numbers, rates.

Anti-vax concerns force removal of deaths by vaccine status data from Public Health Scotland reports

I believe they've now taken the source PDF offline, but i posted the full data charts already.

Regarding deaths, for example, their most recent week of data (Jan 15-21) data shows:

18 deaths out of 1,538,662 unvaccinated.
6 deaths out of 318,638 those who received 1 dose.
30 deaths out of 933,147 of those who received 2 doses.
77 deaths out of 3,070,209 of those who received 3 doses.

The RATES of death were higher for 1 and 2 doses. The rates for death for 3 doses were lower. Of course, those with 3 doses had them recently, and we know that the protection from the vaccines wanes quickly. The data for them was trending towards higher rates as well.

The misinformation is posting data snippets from the CDC, when they've already admitted they're hiding some of the data because "it could be misinterpreted as the vaccines not working".

 

[stevil]

No, not numbers, rates.

Anti-vax concerns force removal of deaths by vaccine status data from Public Health Scotland reports

I believe they've now taken the source PDF offline, but i posted the full data charts already.

Regarding deaths, for example, their most recent week of data (Jan 15-21) data shows:

18 deaths out of 1,538,662 unvaccinated.
6 deaths out of 318,638 those who received 1 dose.
30 deaths out of 933,147 of those who received 2 doses.
77 deaths out of 3,070,209 of those who received 3 doses.

What is meant by the "Age Standardised mortality rate per 100,000"?
Can you provide a link to the report that probably explains this column?
That column is showing
Hospitalisation rate
Unvax = 24.66
Double Vax with booster = 6.84

Death rate
Unvax = 7.3
Double Vax with booster = 1.6


EDIT: following a link provided by KCfromNC to the official report it seems that
"Age Standardised mortality rate per 100,000"
These are adjusted to only include individuals 10 years old and over.
So it seems the raw data is skewed because all Scottish kids under 10 are unvaccinated, and as we already know this disease affects the elderly much more than the young.
So if you include the under 10 year olds in those groups it looks as if the unvacced are doing well, but if you exlude the under 10 year olds you see that the unvacced are doing poorly.
LOL. Anti vax Propaganda at its finest.

 

[Bob Crowley]

The reality is that life has almost returned to normal in most parts of Australia. Some states have very few restrictions and the reason is that a consistent vaccination program has reduced the need for ICU wards and the number of Covid deaths.

We're still required to wear masks in our state Queensland when we go in shopping centres, churches etc, but that ruling will be relaxed on the 4th March (next Friday).

The anti-vaxxers who seem to think we've almost become a dictatorship need to pull their heads in.

COVID-19 update

Upcoming easing of restrictions in Queensland
From 6pm AEST Friday 4 March 2022:

• Masks will no longer be required indoors, except in healthcare settings, residential aged care, disability accommodation, prisons, public transport, airports and on planes.
• Masks will no longer be required in schools, including for staff, students and visitors.
• Masks will still be recommended whenever you can’t social distance.
• There will be no limit on the number of visitors you can have in your home at one time.
• Venues and events will no longer have density limits.

 

[KCfromNC]

What is meant by the "Age Standardised mortality rate per 100,000"?
Can you provide a link to the report that probably explains this column?

Pretty sure this is the source of the numbers, or at least a similar report from about that time : https://publichealthscotland.scot/media/11803/22-01-26-covid19-winter_publication_report-revised.pdf. The people who collected the data from that report seem to disagree with the analysis of the data presented in that report quoted earlier in the thread.

Data and rates presented in this section are not a measure of vaccine effectiveness
Vaccine effectiveness is a scientific method used to measure how well a vaccine protects people against outcomes such as infection, symptoms, hospitalisation and death in the ‘real-world’. Unlike case rates, vaccine effectiveness analysis accounts for potential biases in the data and risk factors such as age, sex, prior infection, co-morbidities, socio-economic status, and time since vaccination. This method is the most robust way to measure if a vaccine is working.
The data and rates presented in this section do not account for these biases and risk factors and should not be used to measure vaccine effectiveness. We include links to vaccine effectiveness studies below.
There are likely to be systematic differences and biases between the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, such as behaviour, vulnerability and previous infection, that are unaccounted for when comparing rates. As most of the population is vaccinated, these differences become more evident and could create bias in case/hospitalisation/death rates between vaccinated and unvaccinated population.

So as the previous times this was posted, we're stuck having to believe that the data in this report is accurate, but at the same time pretend that the people who collected it have no idea what they're talking about. Or that it's all a giant well-planned conspiracy, which was also poorly planned enough to publish the truth for months instead of covering it up from the start.

Or, perhaps random postings on the internet should pay attention when the experts who collected the data say that a naive analysis is misleading.

 

[KCfromNC]

Regarding deaths, for example, their most recent week of data (Jan 15-21) data shows:

18 deaths out of 1,538,662 unvaccinated.
6 deaths out of 318,638 those who received 1 dose.
30 deaths out of 933,147 of those who received 2 doses.
77 deaths out of 3,070,209 of those who received 3 doses.

The RATES of death were higher for 1 and 2 doses.

In one particular cherry-picked week. In a different week, 1 dose mortality rates were an order of magnitude lower. Perhaps it is premature to get too excited concluding that this post has uncovered data which overturns years of vaccine research by finding a fortunate bit of noise in a single week of data?